I'm given to understand that there is a way to have an Item revision... set in Item Master through a Lifecycle change... push out to a CAD file, and then back to Vault File Store from there upon check in. I just can't seem to get the mapping to work out on this. It seems that Revision mapping only "pushes" out to file... not both ways.
I really don't care at thispoint if I start in File Store or Item Master.... but I'd like to set this up so that a Rev change on the one side pushes out to the CAD file, then back to the other side on check in... so all three revisions match. This is my current mapping... I've been playing with it all morning so it's in a shambles...
I can only push one way... any thoughts on this? I'm sure some of you who know more that I do have already made this work.
Solved! Go to Solution.
The file revision controlled by Vault can indeed only be written to the file. The reason being of course if the file revision is being managed by document lifecycles we do not want to break this. The same for Item revision.
So it seems you are mapping the item revision back to the file OK - if you need to display this in Vault my suggestion would be to map the CAD file value to a user defined property like "Item Rev" which can be mapped from File to Vault. This value could be displayed in place of the Existing revision property.
Hope this helps.
Thanks for the response... I've gotten the same from others. Here is the dilemna:
We want to use the Vault Revision Table on our drawings, to reflect the revision set in Vault through an ECO and/or Lifecycle Change.
The Vault Revision Table requires the use of the Standard Vault property "Revision", and only the one from File Store. So... I have to map Revision to my CAD files from File side,... not Item Master.
Ok,... that works fine. The problem is that now the Revision that shows up in Items created from these files... does not match. And everything I am being told is that it will never match, unless I manually update it every time.
Even that might be ok, but wait,... there's more:
Autocad Electrical Projects require the Revision to be mapped FROM THE ITEM MASTER!
I just feel like this is a case of you can't get there from here without a bunch of eleborate workarounds and custom properties.
Back to the drawing board.....
Ah yes, I see,
We have captured a number of similar requirements around revision tables of late - I think ideally you would just like the item revision to be written back to the table right?
I hope you don't mean literally back to the drawing board......
No,... not literally... NIGHTMARE SCENARIO!
I guess I just don't understand the reasoning behind the mismatch. There has to be a reason Vault was designed so that revisions from the files don't get to the Items.... can you share what that is?
Ideally, from where I am right now, knowing (what little) I know... I'd like to set revision in Vault on the file side, (through lifecycle mgt.) and push it to BOTH the CAD file and the Item master.... and just have them all match up. The ONLY reason I want Item Master at all, (right now) is because that's the only place to get the Lifecycle Watermarks on a dwf. Our system is angling toward using ECO's and having the visualization, with the Watermark, be the official drawing document that everyone has access to.
It's just all so convoluted.
Perhaps there was a legitimate reason for some customers that this would be a problem. A possible solution might be a setting or toggle that would allow an Admin to set this up to go whichever way works best for a customer's unique situation?
I hope this is making sense! lol
The simple answer is just different implementations of the technology, the Item lifecycle and revision engine being implemented in Vault Professional some years back before we introduced document lifecycle and revision.
Over time we have gradually started to integrate the two separate engines and this is still ongoing. We would like to have this completed sooner, rather than later but as you can imagine we need to be sensitive to existing item users and ensure the integrity of their workflows and system migration as we go through this integration.
Understanding is half the battle, that you for that. I'll try to be patient and look forward to you guys working your magic. In the meantime, I've become fairly adept at workarounds... time to crack my knuckles and get to it....
Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register
Start with some of our most frequented solutions to get help installing your software.